MARYLEBONE'S REPLY.

Evening Star, Issue 21319, 25 January 1933, Page 6

MARYLEBONE'S REPLY.

In tho midst of the excitement and resentment caused in Australia by the method of attack developed by the English bowlers, the secretary of the Australian Board of Control, at the behest, no doubt, of the members, despatched a cablegram to the M.C.C. headquarters in London. It was a protest devised in haste, and unfortunate in wording. “ There is an intensely bitter feeling among our players,” it said, “ who are likely to be injured.” This ignored the philosophy of tho Australian poet, Adam Lindsay Gordon, famous as a steeplechase rider, which was that no game “ ever was worth a rap for a rational man to play into which no danger, no mishap could possibly find its way.” Then tho message went on to express the opinion that bodyline bowling was unsportsmanlike, and concluded with the singularly ‘ inept statement that unless it was immediately stopped it was likely to upset the friendly relations between Australia and England. It is quite clear that the members of the board were carried off their feet by a storm of popular indignation, and adopted a course that has not unnaturally given rise to the comment that the Australians were “ squealing.” Allowance, of course, must be made for the intense disap. pointment felt by the home side at the results of fho matches. If, however, instead of such ill-considered and precipitate action, a little diplomacy had been brought to bear on the situation, the path might have been smoothed for the remaining tests. Good sportsmanship is a British tradition. From tho evidence it appears that the Australians had some reason (o complain, for in their exuberance the English bowlers seem to have carried the leg theory attack too far, but it is inconceivable that if a friendly and tactful appeal had been made, and a conference hold between captains and other officials, tho complaints would have been ignored. Outbursts of temper by smarting Aus-

tralian players, if excusable under the circumstances, certainly aggravated the position.

As was to be expected, the reply from the Marylebone committee is dignified and judicial. It stands by the British captain and his team, deprecating the charge of unsportsmanlike play and the declaration that the laws and spirit of the game have been infringed. In the concluding sentences, the M.C'.C. puts the issue plainly to the Australian Board of Control. It offers to give careful consideration to any proposal to frame a new law to deal with the particular point in question. Next it suggests that if the Australians are still dissatisfied, and if any unpleasant consequences are likely to arise during the remaining matches, it would, very reluctantly, be willing to cancel the remainder of the programme. This, it will be admitted, is as far as the M.C.C. could reasonably be expected to go. To use a football phrase, the Australians have put themselves “ off-side.” Perhaps after calm reflection they will get “ on-side.” It would almost seem that the sporting spirit in Australia, generally so pronounced, has been lost for the moment. Let us hope that it will bo regained, that the matches will proceed without further friction, and that the accomplished Australian batsmen will resolutely address themselves to the task of mastering the English fast bowling. It will he hoped also that the visitors will be careful to do nothing that will give justification for another attack of nerves by the spectators.